can we get a lock

[martind1]

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=36&threadid=1257940&STARTPAGE=1&zb=189795

 

[Kyteland]

Why was that thread locked? It was a perfectly valid question to a problem he had.

Nothing illegal or against the rules happened

I think the thread should be unlocked so that discussion can continue.

 

[MedicBob]

He wanted to bypass IP traffic shaping that was instituted to prevent what he is trying to do.

 

[CubanCorona]

No MedicBob, I was not. IMO, the thread was locked for no reason.

I am not trying to steal bandwidth from anyone. I have very strict morals. I do not have a single piece of pirated software on my computer, and every single MP3 on my computer was ripped from my own personal CD collection.

For the record, I will explain once more why this is not illegal or unfair. The DSL connection in question is mine. It is in my name, and I pay the bills. The traffic shaping mechanism in question was implemented as per my request. My attempt to utilize the aggregate bandwidth of several IP's is in no way trying to get more bandwidth than I pay for. Even if I was able to do this, my bandwidth would be limited by the speed of the connection FOR WHICH I PAY. I pay for a 1.5 Mbit DSL connection. It is limited by IP on OUR side of the DSL connection. Even if I took up the whole 1.5 Mbit for myself it would be completely legal and fair!!! That is the speed of the connection that I pay for.

It really bothers me that I was attacked so readily, and that the attack was supported by the moderators of this forum. I have been a forum member here for a long time. Although I don't have 500 million posts, I have been around much longer than the individual who decided to point the finger at me.

I would very much like for a moderator to explain why my thread was locked. Is there anyone out there who agrees with me??? On my honor, I would NEVER attempt to rip off bandwidth from an ISP, or anyone for that matter.

*EDIT Appendix*

Martin clearly did not understand the situation. His posts and accusations are a testament to this. He simply does not know enough about networking to understand why this is not illegal or wrong. However, this is not my main concern as people like Martin will be around wherever you are. My main concern is that the moderators instantly locked the thread at his unwarranted request! I've got a couple of threads I'd like locked too. Can you lock all the threads in Operating Systems about Windows? I think Microsoft is a monopoly, and thus their products are illegal and should not be supported.

 

[Buz2b]

Actually I think it's pretty simple and was even mentioned in the thread. The limits were put in place because others were "hogging" bandwidth which in turn slowed your connection to a crawl. Whether they were put in place by your request or not, they were put there by the ISP to prevent the problem. Now that this is done, you want to work around it so that YOU can get more bandwidth, instead of the others. Sorry, while it may or may not be illegal, it is still wrong. What's the difference between them hogging bandwidth with file sharing (if that is the cause) versus you hogging bandwidth using multiple IPs. It doesn't matter if it is in your name or that you are paying the bill. I'm sure the others on your floor pay for their connections also. I'm not totally convinced it should have been locked but I can understand that it is "walking a thin line". The mods can be pretty "careful" at times. They have to draw the line pretty close and err on the side of caution. I don't always agree with them either but I can understand the caution in this case.
That's my opinion but we all know about opinions being like..........!

 

[sswingle]

I see his point. He is paying for the connection shared by several apartments. This isn't like the other apartments are paying full price, they are all paying for a portion of one account (which I find hard to believe any ISP would allow you to set that up, but that is another issue entirely)

So, since the account is in his name, it seems reasonable to me that he should be able to use as much of the bandwidth as he needs, BUT on the other hand, he isn't really being fair to the other apartments.

You use the argument that you just want to use the service that you pay for, however, it seems like you are only paying a portion of the bill. Therefore, you are only entitled to a portion of the bandwidth.


So I guess the only solution to the problem is pay for your own dasm line and not share it with people.

 

[martind1]

my 1 and only response to this thread.

I found you quite rude and the thread was deteriorating quite quickly. Peopel were giving you answers.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: CubanCorona
I would very much like for a moderator to explain why my thread was locked. Is there anyone out there who agrees with me???

I'll buy into that.

 

[AFB]

It was bordering on hacking.

 

[Buz2b]

He wanted to bypass IP traffic shaping that was instituted to prevent what he is trying to do.

So I guess the only solution to the problem is pay for your own dasm line and not share it with people.

I found you quite rude and the thread was deteriorating quite quickly. Peopel were giving you answers.

It was bordering on hacking.

What's the difference between them hogging bandwidth with file sharing (if that is the cause) versus you hogging bandwidth using multiple IPs. It doesn't matter if it is in your name or that you are paying the bill. I'm sure the others on your floor pay for their connections also.

I think these should answer most as to why others think it should have been locked. Understanding that there are always two sides to the story AND that sometimes we post and are not as clear as we would have hoped, can you answer all of these with moral certainty? I would welcome that clarification.

 

[CubanCorona]

I think it would be silly to waste any more time on this discussion. I see all of your points, and I understand where your skepticism comes from. I only ask that you do me the same courtesy. I will happily drop the issue.

At this point, I think implementing this would be more trouble/money than its worth. I suppose my original query was for more of a ?quick fix? to temporarily increase my download speed only for the short periods of time needed.

If I came across as rude, it was only because I felt like I was being attacked unfairly. I was simply defending myself, as anyone in my position would have done. Martin and anyone else who was offended, I apologize for my comments. Hopefully we can all put this behind us.